↓ Skip to main content

Debating the ‘integration of Islam’: the discourse between governmental actors and Islamic representatives in Germany and the Netherlands

Overview of attention for article published in Comparative Migration Studies, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Debating the ‘integration of Islam’: the discourse between governmental actors and Islamic representatives in Germany and the Netherlands
Published in
Comparative Migration Studies, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40878-018-0086-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthias Kortmann

Abstract

This paper examines what influences the views of governmental and Islamic actors in consultations on the integration of Islam in Germany and the Netherlands. Disentangling institutionalist and constructivist assumptions within the concept of political opportunity structures and employing a content analysis of primary documents and interviews, the paper shows that expectations of both approaches apply: On the one hand, Islamic organizations (as challengers) and governmental representatives (as defenders of the status quo) each problematize the issue differently. Yet, their views also depend on specific national contextual factors (i.e. regimes of immigrant integration and religious governance) and, therefore, differ cross-nationally, too. The paper argues that it is fruitful to uncover the ways participants in the discourses define and conceive of central terms and concepts prevalent in order to disclose their fundamental motivations, interests, and strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Lecturer 4 15%
Other 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 31%
Chemical Engineering 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 8 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2018.
All research outputs
#6,302,026
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Comparative Migration Studies
#166
of 295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,168
of 341,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Comparative Migration Studies
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 295 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.